With Europe developing it's own Galileo "GPS" system, I was wondering
how common GPS usage is in Europe in small General Aviation aircraft?
Also, how common is it with the Commercial Carriers? How common are GPS
approaches? Are the GPS approaches scheduled to become Galileo
approaches?

Doug,

> With Europe developing it's own Galileo "GPS" system, I was wondering
> how common GPS usage is in Europe in small General Aviation aircraft?

Very. In fact, extremely. For VFR, most pilots use handhelds. For IFR
(much less common than in the US) above FL100, you need to have BRNAV
equipment, that is RNAV capability to a certain precision. Be far the
easiest and cost-effective way to satisfy that requirement is an
IFR-certified GPS like the 430.

> Also, how common is it with the Commercial Carriers?

Becoming more common, but not that much.

> How common are GPS
> approaches?

We're getting there. Both overlays and stand-alone non-precision GPS
approaches are becoming more and more common. That differs much from
country to country, too. For example, Germany "violates" ICAO in that no
IFR flying in uncontrolled airspace is allowed, which leads to most small
airports not having IFR approaches at all. Still, most airports with ILS
approaches also have GPS approaches. Go figure. Eastern Europe still has
a ton of NDB approaches and even 2 NDB approaches requiring two ADFs
onboard.

> Are the GPS approaches scheduled to become Galileo
> approaches?

Galileo is nowhere near far enough along to plan this. The theory is that
by the time Galileo is ready for operation, dual receivers for GPS and
Galileo will be the norm. Also, the Galileo service that offers both the
precision and the reliability (including reporting failures) required for
approaches will be subscriber-based - read: it will cost you. I have
strong doubts carriers coming in from the US will buy into this. OTOH, if
Eurocontrol makes it a requirement...

It's going to be a mess. One thing, however, I consider to be pretty
sure: While we have a system similar to WAAS called EGNOS, I don't see
any approaches based on that coming.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thanks Thomas, I was hoping you would reply as you seem pretty up on
things. The commercial carries in the US aren't all that tied into GPS
either. A LOT of the sophisticated systems use DME/DME (use of many
DME's). Usually it is just "best solution" and you have to query the
box to tell just how it is finding it's navigation solution at the
moment. But going overseas, sure they must use GPS. It is an
interesting time with GPS. The handhelds are becoming pretty common in
cars and for hiking too....

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Doug,
>
> > With Europe developing it's own Galileo "GPS" system, I was wondering
> > how common GPS usage is in Europe in small General Aviation aircraft?
>
> Very. In fact, extremely. For VFR, most pilots use handhelds. For IFR
> (much less common than in the US) above FL100, you need to have BRNAV
> equipment, that is RNAV capability to a certain precision. Be far the
> easiest and cost-effective way to satisfy that requirement is an
> IFR-certified GPS like the 430.
>
> > Also, how common is it with the Commercial Carriers?
>
> Becoming more common, but not that much.
>
> > How common are GPS
> > approaches?
>
> We're getting there. Both overlays and stand-alone non-precision GPS
> approaches are becoming more and more common. That differs much from
> country to country, too. For example, Germany "violates" ICAO in that no
> IFR flying in uncontrolled airspace is allowed, which leads to most small
> airports not having IFR approaches at all. Still, most airports with ILS
> approaches also have GPS approaches. Go figure. Eastern Europe still has
> a ton of NDB approaches and even 2 NDB approaches requiring two ADFs
> onboard.
>
> > Are the GPS approaches scheduled to become Galileo
> > approaches?
>
> Galileo is nowhere near far enough along to plan this. The theory is that
> by the time Galileo is ready for operation, dual receivers for GPS and
> Galileo will be the norm. Also, the Galileo service that offers both the
> precision and the reliability (including reporting failures) required for
> approaches will be subscriber-based - read: it will cost you. I have
> strong doubts carriers coming in from the US will buy into this. OTOH, if
> Eurocontrol makes it a requirement...
>
> It's going to be a mess. One thing, however, I consider to be pretty
> sure: While we have a system similar to WAAS called EGNOS, I don't see
> any approaches based on that coming.
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Doug,

> It is an
> interesting time with GPS. The handhelds are becoming pretty common in
> cars and for hiking too....
>

I agree. And I think we ain't seen nothing yet. If things around us were
more aware of where they are - wow, a lot of possibilities come to mind.
Socks wirelessly reporting their position, anyone? ;-)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

> Socks wirelessly reporting their position, anyone? ;-)

Maybe that's how we'll find the fourth dimension. :)

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Doug,
>
> > It is an
> > interesting time with GPS. The handhelds are becoming pretty common in
> > cars and for hiking too....
> >
>
> I agree. And I think we ain't seen nothing yet. If things around us were
> more aware of where they are - wow, a lot of possibilities come to mind.
> Socks wirelessly reporting their position, anyone? ;-)

Haven't seen any self-locating socks, but integrating the technology
into other clothing articles has been suggested:
http://hight3ch.com/post/gps-panties/

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 22:06:16 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote:

>I agree. And I think we ain't seen nothing yet. If things around us were
>more aware of where they are - wow, a lot of possibilities come to mind.
>Socks wirelessly reporting their position, anyone? ;-)

Given that socks are the larval form of coathangers, I wonder what will
happen during the metamorphosis.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)